Author
Topic: Gun Fails (Read 38061 times)

The "home invasion" scenario, where dangerous strangers break into an occupied home at night is so terrifying that gun rights people frequently use it as a selling point. "Save your family from being raped and killed in the middle of the night! Get a big gun! Defend your home from the bad guys!"

And the pudgy, middle-aged, near-sighted regular schmo (who only knows about home invasions from watching action movies) imagines that they will be the big hero protecting the wife and kids in a shootout with the bandana-wrapped Asian death gang. Just like Bruce, Ahhnold or Clint. Bring it on, baby!

Problem is this: home invasion by armed killers is the absolute unlikeliest kind of crime. It will never happen to you, unless you are an international double agent who recently informed on a mafia don after stealing money from a drug cartel.

In the vast majority of burglaries, the bad guys case the home and generally wait until the people leave. Criminals mainly want a fast, easy way to get your stuff; they are not looking for messy people trouble, believe it or not. Regular burglary is usually avoided by having good locks, a good fence, a burglar alarm system and/or a noisy dog. Police stats reveal that many, if not most burglaries and thefts occur because people leave their homes unsecured, ie doors or windows are unlocked and valuables are left out in plain view.[1]

In the rare case where the bad guy does want trouble, and is crazy or desperate or ruthless or stupid enough to break into an occupied home, your best bet is still to try to get out and call the cops. That person is irrational, and already more dangerous than you are prepared to be. You pull out a gun and it jams or your first shot does not take him down, you will not get another chance.

The only exception I can think of to the above is the awful domestic violence cases where the crazed ex is stalking, has threatened the person, and breaks in. This is not a stranger invasion of the kind described by the gun promoters. Adding a gun to that scenario increases the likelihood that someone ends up dead, but sadly, it is not always the bad guy.[2]

There was a robbery on my block one summer evening. The bad guys drove up and took off with everything they could grab from my neighbor's open garage, including tools and ATV's! The family was actually at home in the backyard enjoying a barbecue at the time. I don't see how a gun would have helped--would have been better to simply close the door to the garage.

My 5 foot 2 mother got a gun to protect herself from my crazy, violent 6 foot 3 father. But if her first shot did not finish him, what was the chance that he would have let her get off a second? Luckily it never came to that....

In the 1990s, a team headed by Arthur Kellermann of Emory University looked at all injuries involving guns kept in the home in Memphis, Seattle and Galveston, Tex. They found that these weapons were fired far more often in accidents, criminal assaults, homicides or suicide attempts than in self-defense. For every instance in which a gun in the home was shot in self-defense, there were seven criminal assaults or homicides, four accidental shootings, and 11 attempted or successful suicides.

and...

Quote

there was “no clear evidence” that victims’ access to a gun reduced their risk of being killed. Another 2003 study, by Douglas Wiebe of the University of Pennsylvania, found that females living with a gun in the home were 2.7 times more likely to be murdered than females with no gun at home.

We don't really have that many guns in the hands of the public in the UK.

I'll set the scene for most of the UK;

It is late at night. You are sleeping in your bed, just like everyone. You don't have a gun because you don't have a legitimate need for one, you're not a farmer. Suddenly, glass breaks downstairs and you're awoken. You hear the intruder rummaging around.Instinctively, you reach up to your mobile communications device and quickly unlock it, dialling the emergency services (who will also be unarmed).

You silently make sure that everyone near you is safe and silent, and lock your bedroom door. Should the burglar see you and begin running at you, you and everyone with you run the other way.

You are under no obligation to not to fight. He invaded your property and you have a right to self defense, you could properly fuck him up under new legislation and get away with it. Or would you rather not be a psycho and let the cops deal with a situation that they are trained for and paid to handle.

The Kelley’s residence is almost two miles from the Oklahoma Full Auto Shoot and Trade Show, which was held in Wyandotte over the weekend. The military cannon was listed on the show’s website as a new attraction.

Morons cannot be trusted with handguns, how the hell did they get a cannon?

We don't really have that many guns in the hands of the public in the UK.

I'll set the scene for most of the UK;

It is late at night. You are sleeping in your bed, just like everyone. You don't have a gun because you don't have a legitimate need for one, you're not a farmer. Suddenly, glass breaks downstairs and you're awoken. You hear the intruder rummaging around.Instinctively, you reach up to your mobile communications device and quickly unlock it, dialling the emergency services (who will also be unarmed).

You silently make sure that everyone near you is safe and silent, and lock your bedroom door. Should the burglar see you and begin running at you, you and everyone with you run the other way.

You are under no obligation to not to fight. He invaded your property and you have a right to self defense, you could properly fuck him up under new legislation and get away with it. Or would you rather not be a psycho and let the cops deal with a situation that they are trained for and paid to handle.

This is a different perspective.

And what is the response time for emergency services?

Logged

Q: Why are quantum physicists bad lovers? A: Because when they find the position, they can't find the momentum, and when they have the momentum, they can't find the position.

I really want to believe there's some vital detail missing that would at least explain why this woman did what she did. As in, she's clinically insane, perhaps. Or was drugged or otherwise judgement-impaired.

Logged

Live a good life... If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. I am not afraid.--Marcus Aurelius

If the burglar has a gun, they might shoot at you and you might get badly hurt or killed. If you also have a gun, they will most definitely shoot at you. And you might get badly hurt or killed. The only way to come out of that confrontation safe and sound is to be the one who shoots first.

Now, are you really ruthless and desperate enough to shoot first, not knowing if the burglar is armed, is after you or just wants your stuff? In a darkened house, with you just woken up how do you even know for sure it is a burglar? Are you willing to shoot and possibly kill your kid brother who you forgot was staying in the guest room; your teenage daughter's idiot boyfriend sneaking out of her bedroom; a foreign exchange student who ended up at the wrong house? Remember, the cello music tells you it's a bad guy on the movies, but not in real life.

I am saying that there might be times when a person is perfectly justified in shooting a gun at someone in their house. Statistically, however, it is far more likely that the person you shoot is not a dangerous killer at all. There are just not that many bad guys out there breaking into occupied homes. There are far, far more kid brothers, idiot boyfriends and foreign students.

That is not the scenario you originally potrayed. You are changing the terms of this hypothetical situation to get the answer you want. But the answer you want is a romantic fantasy, and reality is not obligated to turn out that way. I gave you three situations you did not account for, all of which could result in your death. You don't seem to have any answers for them.

That seems to be a pervasive problem with guns. They seem to make people think they are stars in their own action movie and ignore real dangers.

A man carrying a holstered firearm entered the store to make a purchase. Another customer, also with a holstered firearm, approached him and demanded to see his identification and firearms license, according to the Valdosta Police Department report.

The customer making demands for ID pulled his firearm from its holster but never pointed it at the other customer, who said he was not obligated to show any permits or identification.

It's funny, I'll bet the thought he was the good guy with the gun. It is so confusing to keep it straight who the good guys and bad guys are...

If only they went back to wearing white and black hats, respectively. =/

Logged

The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?We choose our own gods.

"Whaddya think I am, a Mexican immigrant? A black American running for president? A cabbie in a turban? Someone who looks Middle Eastern? Badges? I don't need to show you any stinking badges. Or ID's or permits, either. I'm a white man and I gotcha permit to carry right here!"

Blammo! Blam blam blam blammo!

More guns= more people pretending to be in an action movie= more death in real life.

I made the mistake of reading the news article comments. Readers who wrote in tend to blame the spate of violence on:a) President Obama, b) people who don't speak English, and c) brown and black people who do not contribute to this country and should just stop coming here.[1]

Not much in the comments about the interesting relationship between lots of guns, youth gangs fighting over illegal drug territory, and increased numbers of shootings. Decriminalize drugs and reduce the number of guns. Magically, the shootings would diminish, even with loose minority people wandering around freely instead of being chained on plantations, the liberals banning of god's sacred English from civil society, and non-American Hussein Obama as "president".

Funny how seldom race or citizenship or language ability is brought up when white guys go nuts and shoot up a school or workplace.

You can always count on xenophobia -- works every time.

We have had a number of shootings by Asian males. Since there is not a stereotype of the violent crazy Asian guy with a gun, race did not come up as a factor in the commentary.

Also, the vast majority of shootings are by men, but there is no outcry about how men do not contribute enough to the country, or how Obama is letting men get away with too much, or how we should restrict all male immigration or kick all men out of the country. Confiscating guns from all men, imposing mandatory police searches on all men, and putting all men under curfew, (where they would have to be off the street after a certain hour or have to be accompanied by a female relative) would probably reduce violent crime rates overall.

I am not proposing it, either. I am just pointing out the double standard people use for those different from them. Right wingers have proposed stuff like curfews, and support police searches for black and brown people as ways to reduce crime.

(CNN) -- Tom Greer says he fought back when he was attacked by intruders at his Southern California home. Then he got his gun and fired at them and they ran.

The 80-year-old homeowner says one of the fleeing burglars, a woman, shouted, "I'm pregnant!" He shot her twice, killing her.

I have no problem with the man shooting at an intruder. Anyone who breaks into a home should expect to be met with some violent opposition (personally I prefer a baseball bat or an axe). He shouldn't have shot them when they were running away and/or off his property. Given his age and prior burglaries, I can understand why he did what he did.

Logged

John 14:2 :: In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.

(CNN) -- Tom Greer says he fought back when he was attacked by intruders at his Southern California home. Then he got his gun and fired at them and they ran.

The 80-year-old homeowner says one of the fleeing burglars, a woman, shouted, "I'm pregnant!" He shot her twice, killing her.

I have no problem with the man shooting at an intruder. Anyone who breaks into a home should expect to be met with some violent opposition (personally I prefer a baseball bat or an axe). He shouldn't have shot them when they were running away and/or off his property. Given his age and prior burglaries, I can understand why he did what he did.

I was going to bring up this story yesterday, but wasn't sure where to put it, so glad to find it here already.

What really steams me is the guy's attitude. While I can understand (sort of) the use of a gun as self-defense, that was clearly not the case here as they were, by that point, fleeing the scene. And his comments were (and I may be paraphrasing, but I think I'm close) were, "she said, 'don't shoot me, I'm pregnant', but I shot her anyway", and "the woman wasn't running as fast as the guy was, so I shot her twice, and she's dead". It's as though he is bragging about it. And now they are trying to charge her accomplice with her murder while the guy who actually shot her is lauded as some sort of hero...Don't know how that is going to play out yet, from what I understand they are still reviewing the case, but while they were both clearly in the wrong for burglarizing the house and knocking the old man around, it doesn't make any sort of sense to me to totally exonerate him while pinning an actual murder on the accomplice.

I was taken aback, as well, by reading the comments (this was yesterday, and I don't know whether it was the same source, or whether the reactions are any more balanced now), but probably at least 95% of what I was reading was along the lines of "Yay for the old guy, and good riddance for taking one scumbag out of the gene pool; too bad he didn't kill them both". It was like a frenzy of congratulation for the guy, and no thought whatsoever that he might have done anything but a favor to the world. I guess the autopsy will show whether or not she was actually pregnant, but even if she was lying (as most of the comments seem to believe) doesn't make shooting her in the back any more right.